To the nearest hundred, 800
A more reasonable estimate would be 15.
280 + 500 = 780
The front end estimate is 800. But estimating a single number, in isolation and without context, is a complete waste of time. It all comes down to the context of what needs to be done with the number.If I had to add 779 to 1 trillion, I would estimate it as 0.If I had to add 779 to 0.0000000001, I would use the number as given, or possibly the front end estimate. If I had to divide it by 7, I would estimate it as 770, because 770/7= 110. If I had to divide it by 10, I would estimate it as 780, because 780/10 = 78.
77.6 is about twice the value of 38. So d8 must go into 776 2 times, 20 times, 200 times, etc. Changing that 77.6 number back to 776 must add one decimal place to 2 times, and it becomes 20 times.The actual times is about 20.42, so the estimate was pretty close.
35% of 780= 35% * 780= 0.35 * 780= 273
a moderate estimate, not expensive, reasonable in price
Estimate the answer. If the calculated answer is close to the estimate then it is reasonable.
12 centimetres is a reasonable estimate.
For multiplication or division, the only reasonable estimate is -2.
20.4211
A more reasonable estimate would be 15.
A reasonable estimate is 1000. The actual total is 1016.
A reasonable estimate of the sum of 78 and 119 is 197.
24 is a reasonable estimate. (78% of 31 is 24.18).
What reasonable estimate for the size of a cell's nucleus?
10 metres is not just a more reasonable estimate, it is the only estimate that anyone but an ignoramus would make.10 metres is not just a more reasonable estimate, it is the only estimate that anyone but an ignoramus would make.10 metres is not just a more reasonable estimate, it is the only estimate that anyone but an ignoramus would make.10 metres is not just a more reasonable estimate, it is the only estimate that anyone but an ignoramus would make.
I think it is a reasonable thing